Skip to main content
1:30 am
10.1. i don't want to take it off the calendar, but the only way to talk about it if it's separated? >> directors, you can discuss it if you wish to agendize it for closed session at another meeting. >> i don't want to hold it up. can we just happening on to that one for a little later in the meeting and come back to it? >> yes. >> okay. thank you. so minus 10.1, is there a motion? >> move to approve. >> second? >> >> any further discussion? all those in favor, signify by saying aye? >> aye. >> moving on to the regular agenda, item 11 presentation bun discussion regarding the sfmta's 2012 year-end financial
1:31 am
1:32 am
good afternoon. >> good afternoon. so we're here to present the fiscal year audit, as we do every year, fiscal 11-12. as you remember from prior years, the auditor is selected by the controller, and the auditor comes in and gives the financial picture of our financial status. and also does a single-audit and provides letter. this is a second year in a row we have received no findings, which is good and this is the first year we have -- this is the earliest we have completed the audit, which is a good trend. so here we're comparing fy11 fy12 numbers, our revenues went up by $6 1 million and you can see the areas where our revenues went up. the majority of it came from the general fund baseline, which you know, because the
1:33 am
economy improved, we received additional general fund monies. and we also received significant more additional federal and state grants. those are our two largest increases in state revenue. we also got $16 million from fares and parking meters, a combination -- mostly due to our annual fare increases that we now have established a policy on and the fact that we are getting more money from parking meter because of our new technology. to offset the increase in revenue of $6 1 million we saw an increase in expenditures of $54 million and mostly in the personnel services and repairs and maintenance cost line items. so we change our from $7 million in the prior year. here is a picture of our bloat, which gives you a sense of our assets and liabilities. our assets went up $225 million from the prior year.
1:34 am
the majority of it is in higher revenues and investment of capital assets. we shows decreases because debt service were decreased because as you know we resised es reissued debt. we had increases in other postemployment benefit, and our liabilities went up. so the full financial picture is much better. unless you have any specific questions for me, i would like to turn it over to the kpmg auditor, who led the audit. tiffany.
1:35 am
. >> [tkpwao-frpl/], >> good afternoon, i will be very short. i have been doing this for 12 years now and on the audit everything went extremely smoothly. there was an unqualified audit opinion and the single audit, will be completed this month. i provided advance materials on required communications which tell you all that good stuff. so i will entertain any questions that you have. >> thank you. there is no action required by the board? >> correct. >> if i could ask a question, i read in the paper that supervisor wiener is very interested in measuring performance in order to get more money for the agency. are you involved in this?
1:36 am
can you tell us? >> we just received notification of the hearing. so i'm sure we'll be participating. i think he asked the controller to also look at the impacts citywide, so it's beyond just the mta impact and it would be interesting to know that information, the impact of the city with delay of transit services. >> very good. very interested in the progress of that. thank you so much. anybody want to speak about this one? >> no member of the public indicated that they are interested in addressing you on this matter. moving on to item 12, awarding contract no. 1260r integrated smiths replacement project to blocka construction to replace and install the subway public address/platform display system, the scada system, a subway fiber broadband network
1:37 am
system and uninterruptable power supplies systems in an amount not to skeet $24,116,000 and for a term of 573 calendar days. >> good afternoon, vince harris director capital programs. i'm also joined this afternoon by our mr. frank lyle just a brief presentation. the scope includes replacement of controlling and communication systems. it's a multi-faceted effort it improve realtime passenger information and system safety, reliability, and expandable of the system by replacing the following components: first we'll replace the subway public address and platform display system, which provides the audio and visual information within the nine muni stations.
1:38 am
it will provide enhanced realtime passenger information on a continuous basis, replacing the facility supervisor control and data acquisition system. the acronym you have heard us talk about, we call it scada. which provides the capability of remote monitoring and control of system alarms and emergency ventilation functions of the nine muni stations from the new central control facilities. the third part of the project will replace the mode of power scada system and control of the 26 transit substations used by the charlie buses and light rail vehicles. i will note for members in this project the mode of power scope is limited only to the replacement of the system computers, and extension of the computers to the central control facilities. fourthly replacing the fiber broadband new mexico system
1:39 am
which connects all systems in the subway to central control. and lastly, this replaces the uninterruptable power supplies systems, which is a mouthful, which provides critical backup in event of a power outage. for members' reference this project provides a communication platform for the existing sfmta central control functions to be seamlessly migrated and to plug in as one unfied and integrated network. as a quick contract bidding history for members, the director of transportation notified this body he had an authorized a bid call for this contract. with his directive our agency opened bids and were received from blocka construction at
1:40 am
$24,116,000. lk comstock, normal transit, inc. and the high bidder was dallas transport and security at $26,530,000. bids were received from the second and third bidders. division staff and the [kwr-frpb/]'s office investigated all of these allegations and found them to be without merit. contract compliance determined that the low bidder met the 20% sbe goal as prescribed and also in compliance with the administrative code chapter 12b. staff recommends award of the contract to blocka construction as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in the amount of $24,116,000. that completes my basic report and staff will be glad to answer any questions that members might. >> thank you, mr. harris.
1:41 am
members of the board, questions? members of the public? >> no members of the board have indicated that they wish to comment. >> mr. heinicke. >> thank you for a very good report and very comprehensive and to the point. i want to make sure i understand it and clarify for emp. there are two aspects, one is the [kpwh-upbgs/] and in particular the public address systems and in the past i have talked about letting our customers know what is going on, especially in the event of a service disruption of it's just very helpful and there has been a lot of progress on that in my term. i see this helping that as well. but this isn't just about communications. i mean, this project will also address some of the issues that we have had that have caused metro service disruptions. am i understanding that correctly? >> that is correct. it is primarily communications, however. and of course, communications a
1:42 am
viable link making sure that we have a viabling alternative way to make sure that he with do communicate between central control and in particular the subway. the uninterruptible power supply is critical, in case those systems do go down. >> right. so i guess what i'm trying to say, we had one very serious service interruption because of a derailment. efforts to make sure that that didn't happen. we had a lot of service disruptions because the [kpwh-upbgs/] for communication was disrupted. this contract is actually going to address some of the problems that we have encountered specifically that have caused service disruptions. do i misunderstand that? >> i would say just a bit, because primarily this is communications in the system. but as you well know that is a
1:43 am
vital component in terms of how the system operates. i would say it's primarily communication-related. i might let frank address the other issues relative to your question. >> my understanding is that we encountered some service disruptions. if that is not so, i just want to understand what we're doing here. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. >> if i could clarify a little bit. yes. >> just state your name. >> my name is frank, the project manager. the system we're replacing will see and detect the problems in the subway. for example, as you mentioned earlier, if there is a power outage, the new system will be on a realtime basis, letting central control
1:44 am
personnel know so they can quickly respond to the outage and do a quick restoration of service. so that is just one of the many examples. >> okay. i got it. thank you. >> members of the board? director ramos? >> so if i'm understanding the conversation that is happening here, it sounds like this system would actually help expedite the recovery time? >> right. >> and thereby saving us resources. >> yes. because the communication detection system that we will replace will give the realtime-based information to central control. so they will know exactly to pinpoint where the problem and to act to it quickly. >> respond to it quickly while trains are sitting in the tunneling. it's my long windied way to say we're not just upgrading signs. >> it sounds like it's a system we definitely need. one quick question. how old was the current system
1:45 am
right now? >> nearly 30 years old. in fact, because it's so old, there are times there is difficulty getting replacement parts since the old system of communication is old, it will be difficult to communicate with new systems. as we mentioned one of the advantages of this new communication system will be the tie-in for central subway coming online with new communication products will be able to tie directly in as a plug-in tool. this is really an avenue to bring communication to the state-of-the-art for sfmta. >> thank you. >> anything else from members? so is there a motion on this recommendation, resolution? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> any further discussion, all those in favor, say aye? >> aye. >> thank you very much. thank you members. >> item 13 approving sfmta as
1:46 am
2013 legislative program thank you kate. >> kate, manager of government affairs. go to see all of you directors. director yee, thank you. this afternoon i'm going to focus on the highlights here. each year as much of you know we take a legislative program before you. this program has been reviewed with the city and county of san francisco state legislative committee, including members of the board of supervisors, as well as earlier this month we reviewed the program, the draft program with the sfmta's citizens' advisory committee that was a good opportunity to go over in detail the recommendations brand new before you today. just to quickly walk you through some of the priorities here. starting with
1:47 am
the coming year to deal with. our staff is preparing briefing materials so that they are familiar with the issues of the sfmta and our understanding of the broader realm of responsibilitis that this agency now has. the rest of the program here really focuses on the future in the coming year, discussions on plans for san francisco's implementation of the recently approved vlf legislation at the state level. i will make a note ever that for the portion of your conversation this afternoon on the state picture. we'll also anticipate a number of contracts going to the board in the coming year, as well as grants that need to be approved. in terms of measured projects the central subway, as was mentioned in mr. yee 's report,
1:48 am
we'll have issues before the board of supervisors on an ongoing basis. pagoda palace. as well as the transportation sustainability program, which is a major initiative, looking to evolve how away from a level of service-oriented fee-based system to one that looks more broadly across impacts for development in the city. on the state portion as i mentioned we have not just a new two-year session, but a real historical moment in sacramento with two-thirds democrats, as well as a democratic governor. it's an opportunity that the majority party is mindful of not squandering and with
1:49 am
regards to initiatives that we'll see this year, i think the vlf is something that is being talked about as another opportunity for transportation funding at the state level, something that previous administrations have not wanted to look at in terms of bringing that state vehicle license fee back up to historical levels. if that happens, i think we in san francisco have to be mindful that we uniquely already have that authority and to the extent that the state chooses to embrace that authority, where do we stand? since conversations are underway in san francisco about how to spend our own vlf, i think we need to take a strategic, somewhat defensive position to make sure that we don't lose that to the state's interest, valid as it is, to invest at the state level. the governor released his budget, which most of you know, just recently. it's pretty good for transportation. there are some projected adjustments, if will you in the
1:50 am
state transit assistance, which is a key source of operating funds for this agency. we have confirmed with our cfo, despite of that fluctuation in that fund source, our budget is okay. fairly conserve estimate that allows for the fluctuation in that fund source. that fund source used to be a line item in the budget, but you recall a couple of years ago there was a gas tax swap, a complicated maneuver to ensure that transportation funds continued to flow. the result is that the state transit assistance is now based on the details sales tax receipts. that is a fluctuating amount of money and therefore we only rely on the projections over the course of the year. so far it looks pretty good. the other big news is that the state is looking pretty good. troop prop 30 passed, significant dollars in projected revenue. so i think we find ourselves in
1:51 am
a cautiously optimistic time. we'll be following that as the year unfolds. we participate in that process through various trade associations and our meeting, in fact, next week with the commit staff working on the bill to have california's law conform for the federal law. cap and trade another very large statewide issue. san francisco as a city family is engaging on that through our advocacy, our lobbyists, as well as the league of cities, california state association of counties and others who have an interest in making sure that local government and transportation programs in particular, given that transportation emits 38% of the state's greenhouse gas emissions do see some benefit
1:52 am
from the auction revenues that are generated. 4 and 5 together, 4 we really are looking at the final closeout of the high speed rail bond program, which san francisco has received its allocation from that. and the companion proposition 1b we received really great news that $117 million check is being suspect for the central project. that project has proven it's readiness to spend those kind of funds and our project in san francisco is a really good example to the state in terms of readiness, if you will for these bond programs. leading to what does the future look like? there is a very active conversation going on and a refresh on the california transportation needs assessment to figure out what does california need to start thinking about in terms of a new revenue source to make major transportation investments? and we again will be at the table participating in those conversations.
1:53 am
6 is a somewhat -- you say what are we sponsoring here? that isn't determined yet. we're working with the california bicycle coalition, as well as the san francisco bicycle coalition to figure out if there is an interest in amending state law. so [stao-upbl/]ed stay tuned on that. no. 7 is important. it's a measure that we're sponsoring this year and i think it's timely given the employee awards that were announced today. stay law currently provides protection for various classes of our employees including station agents, transit operators and passengers and taxi drivers for battery, another more severe form of assault. but it doesn't explicitly attack our transit fare inspectors or officers. so we're sponsoring legislation in sacramento to ensure that front line employees are protected under the law to the same level
1:54 am
our other employees are protected. it's a very important initiative and we're working closely with the enforcement staff in making that case in sacramento. no. 8 is related to that, but we sort of had an evolving concept on fare citation enhancement and having our staff look at how collection could be better in terms of fare evasion? we're really looking to improve that process and to the accident there is something from that that involves a change this state law, we'll be making a recommendation. the 9th -- no. 9, this is really related to the work under way of the accessible parking advisory committee. this was a group convened back in november to look at the issue of accessible parking, as well as disabled placard form in whatever form that is supportable. we really look forward to the work of this committee as to
1:55 am
recommendations that may or may not result in recommended state law changes. there may be other remedis that this group that is made up of a very broad group of stakeholders is looking at addressing accessible parking issues. the last few here, ceqa reform we're following it to see where it goes at state level. we don't have a define ask for ceqa reform, but there are a lot of conversations going on at the state level. the taxi legislation we'll work with chris and her team to make sure we're engaging on those issues as appropriate. moving to the federal side, the mayor is back there this week and director reiskin is also back there this week, really talking about federal prioritis in general. trying to make -- we have been thinking about what matters now? we have our full funding grant agreement and what is our method in washington? one the most important things is to emphasize the continued need for the federal-local
1:56 am
partnership. so much of the investment that is made in san francisco for capital projects, the major projects that you have all heard reported about for the last couple of years, those are funded with federal dollars and this is a good year to talk about why that investment matters' with make the case for increased federal investment. lastly we are looking at the next aprojection appropriation cycle to make sure that those programs continue to be funded and projects like the central subway are able to secure the appropriate funding levels. thank you item happy to answer questions.
1:57 am
tch director ramos? >> thank you kate. i wanted to expressly point out the enhanced protection. i run into those guys regularly, and if you give them just 30 seconds of your time, they have so many stories. what some of these guys have gone through is really tragic to hear. so thank you for that. i wanted to see if there was any appropriate time or more appropriate time to address the moving violations questions, the camera on your buses in the dedicated transit lanes and this would have been the appropriate place for it? >> it's a good question. we have -- we were successful
1:58 am
last year in getting the camera program reauthorized. and that initiative was always pursued as a parking violation. because pd is really responsible for the moving violations. this fall we had some inquiries from our partners across the bay, ac transit who are starting their own brt program and they are interested in the question and looking awhether or not there are other ways to skin the cat, as in maybe those violations are defined as separate and apparent from other types of moving violations. from this agency's perspective, i think we still have a burden of proof, frankly to show the success of the forward-facing camera program and given that we have to go back to the legislature in march of 2015, that is probably the best time to make our case. >> okay. >> and so that is really where we are at with that.
1:59 am
>> i asked the question mostly because one of the things that i really, really detest about our service is the way we have to wrap our vehicles. i think it's so tacky. it's blight now. it's gotten to the level it's a moving billboard. i know there is a lost lot of revenue there, but not only is it unsightly for everyone who has to see those, but it's really is degrading to climb on those vehicles and have your sunlight take away. i understands the vehicles, but at least the vehicle themselves. so people are panicked and getting on the wrong vehicles sometimes. so whatever we can do to get away from that revenue system and to better revenues i think we're on the

January 16, 2013 1:30am-2:00am PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY San Francisco 8, California 5, Sacramento 3, Sfmta 2, Us 2, Ramos 2, Transportation Funding 1, Frank Lyle 1, Pagoda Palace 1, Inc. 1, Kpmg 1, Kate 1, Realtime 1, Vince Harris 1, San Francisco As A City 1, Reiskin 1, Citywide 1, Washington 1, The City 1, Lk Comstock 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color